This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH
MONDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 11TH BHADRA, 1941
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.803 OF 2019
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CRL.A NO.38/2013 DATED 24-05-2019 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CC 1486/2010 DATED 22-12-2012 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,THRISSUR
REVISION PETITIONER/2ND APPELLANT:
DAVI.V.THATTIL, AGED 62 YEARS S/O. VARGHESE, THATTIL PADIYATH HOUSE, CHELAKKOTTUKARA, KIZHAKKEKOTTA P.O, THRISSUR.
BY ADVS. SRI.LINDONS C.DAVIS SMT.E.U.DHANYA SRI.RAJITH DAVIS
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS & 1ST RESPONDENT:
1 PREETHA PANDIAN AGED 38 YEARS W/O.PANDIYAN, THEVARA HOUSE, KOORKANCHERY DESOM, KANNAMKULANGARA, THRISSUR - 680 007.
2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031.
3 SOUMYA KURIES AND LOANS PVT.LTD, ROUND SOUTH, THRISSUR-680001, REPRESENTED BY OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA - 682 031.
OTHER PRESENT:
PP C.K.PRASAD
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.09.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.803 OF 2019 2
O R D E R
Dated this the 2nd day of September 2019
The learned counsel for the revision petitioner has argued the case on admission at length. Though she had advanced arguments to sustain the revision, going by the judgment of the trial court as well as that of the appellate court, this Court has found that the very same contentions were taken even at the trial stage as well as at the appellate stage, which were considered and discarded by the respective courts. The very same arguments are now projected before this Court also. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner had not let in evidence to substantiate any of the contentions taken before the trial court as well as the appellate court. Therefore, this Court finds no reason to admit the revision on file.
In the result, the Crl.R.P stands dismissed.
Sd/-
MARY JOSEPH
JUDGE
ab
DAVI.V.THATTIL
PREETHA PANDIAN
STATE OF KERALA
SOUMYA KURIES AND LOANS PVT.LTD
MARY JOSEPH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
